ANGLICAN COMMUNITIES

'Smokescreens' Price of 'Comprehensiveness'
SIR,-The author of that 641-page hook, the sub-title of which The reference to a " smokescreen?' and the remark: " we cannot frankly for the life of us see what sort of leg the learned Doctor can find to stand on." convey the impression that the author of the article has not grasped the fact that smokescreens and the ability to stand without legs are part and parcel of the comprehensive nature of Anglicanism.
Ever since the Jerusalem Bishopric agitation of the eighteenforties; the Gorham Judgement of 1850, right on through the past century Anglo-Catholics have been accustomed to live through one " crisis " after .another, not forgetting all the Kikuyo excitement of about forty years ago. As each crisis reaches its climax. a few Anglicans receive the Gift of Faith, while the rest happily resume their attitude of live and let live. As
Shakespeare says: " Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows."
The Church of England does not recognise "The Religious State " in any official legislation. Members of its religious communities are either "clerks in holy orders" or layfolk living in corporate bodies, It is only since the "Advisory Council on Religious Communities " for the Provinces of Canterbury and York was set up in 1935 that there has existed any method of communication between the Bishops and the Communities. But this Council can do nothing more than give advice when asked to do so: it has no legal status, akin to that of our Sacred Congregation of Religious. Its members are merely liaison officers.
All that matters in the long run to the average Anglo-Catholic. whether he or she is a member of a religious community. or a parson,
layman or laywoman, is the freedom to live a " Catholic Life," without interference from the ecclesiastical authorities.
'1 he " basic issues" regarding reunion with the Church of South India have been summed up by Fr. H. Edward Symonds, C.R., in the Christmas number of " C.R " (the quarterly review of the Community of the Resurrection). He says: " There seems to be nothing in the Report and the resolutions of Convocation. which gives colour to the idea that the Church in England has abandoned any part of its Catholic witness to the fundamental doctrines of the Church, or its insistence on a Catholic hierarchy, which admits of no exceptions." He admits that there are several details in the proposals that " call for reform " or " need to be stiffened," but emphasises that " the Church in England is in no way committed to any of the less desirable features." What he recommends is that the Church at home should " send out priests to work there without compromising Catholic principles." so that a little more " Catholicism " can be infiltrated into the Church of South India, He reminds his readers that this Church has "an admirable liturgy, which Pere Bouyer says, would be considered as adequate if the Church of South India sought union with Rome."
More " smokescreens?' you )ee! Like Dr. Mascall, my friend Fr. Symonds has found a new leg to stand upon!
Personally, I find it quite easy to understand all this elusive thinking, because my paternal grandfather was an Anglican Canon. and his father a Dean. Four of my uncles were Anglican parsons of varied " schools of thought." One greatgreat uncle was an Archbishop of York. A first-cousin by marriage was the late Archbishop of Canterbury. One of my two sisters, now the wife of a broad-high parson, was an Anglican Deaconess. Finally. I myself spent three years as an Anglican Benedictine.
Peter F. Anson.
[And the leading article scribe was the grandson of an Anglican Bishop !-Editor. C.H.1